Any registered user can nominate an article for '''featured''' status. It should be well-written, complete, illustrated, and referenced. After nomination, an article should receive five votes with with no objections within a month or so. Each entry should begin with '''Agree''' or '''Disagree''' and be signed by the user. One vote allowed per user, of course. For the sake of practicality, let's limit active nominations to '''two articles''' at a time. Further nominations should be held in the queue, in reserve.

+

Any registered user can nominate an article for '''featured''' status. It should be well-written, complete, illustrated, and referenced and meet these specific criteria:

+

+

:::#The text is ''entirely'' written by TG editors with correct English spelling, grammar and punctuation;

+

:::#There are no outstanding [[:Category:Maintenance templates|maintenance templates]] on the article;

+

:::#The article is well-referenced throughout, leaving the reader under no illusions as to where to source information themselves;

+

:::#The article conforms to TG's [[Tolkien Gateway:Manual of Style|Standards]], as well as those laid out in the relevant [[Tolkien Gateway:Projects|Project]];

+

:::#The text is sprinkled with ''relevant'' [[Help:Images|images]] (including captions) of appropriate size - if necessary, including a gallery;

After nomination, an article should receive five votes with with no objections within a month or so; each user being able to cast one vote. Each entry should begin with '''Agree''', '''Disagree''' or '''Undecided''' and be signed by the user, and, if they choose, an explanation of their vote.

* '''Agree'''. Nice long article, good information, plus good introduction into Tolkien. {{unsigned|ZehnWaters}}

* '''Agree'''. Nice long article, good information, plus good introduction into Tolkien. {{unsigned|ZehnWaters}}

Line 32:

Line 43:

:'''Undecided''' - although well-written, I think it needs to be better referenced as we should only show off the ''very best'' articles that TG has to offer. --{{User:Mith/sig}} 14:19, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

:'''Undecided''' - although well-written, I think it needs to be better referenced as we should only show off the ''very best'' articles that TG has to offer. --{{User:Mith/sig}} 14:19, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

−

−

==[[Eriador]]==

−

Don't need to say much about [[Eriador]], perfect example of good article. --[[User:Morgan|Morgan]] 21:17, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

−

*'''Agree''' - Because it's just so awesome. --{{User:KingAragorn/sig}} 21:22, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

*'''Agree''' - As I wrote it! --{{User:Mith/sig}} 14:15, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

==[[Dwarves]]==

==[[Dwarves]]==

Line 45:

Line 50:

*'''Undecided''' - As an article it needs some work, as is clear with the <nowiki>{{sources}}</nowiki> template at the top. However I agree that as a race they are often overlooked. --{{User:KingAragorn/sig}} 03:32, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

*'''Undecided''' - As an article it needs some work, as is clear with the <nowiki>{{sources}}</nowiki> template at the top. However I agree that as a race they are often overlooked. --{{User:KingAragorn/sig}} 03:32, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

*'''Disagree''' - A complete lack of sources, the structure is a bit haphazard and it contains a few too many redlinks and spelling errors for my liking. --{{User:Mith/sig}} 12:08, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

*'''Disagree''' - A complete lack of sources, the structure is a bit haphazard and it contains a few too many redlinks and spelling errors for my liking. --{{User:Mith/sig}} 12:08, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

−

*'''Agree''' - I have been personally working on compiling all the information I can find on Dwarves in Tolkiens books, even if it conflicts with itself. Once it is compiled for my personal use I will copy it to this website. --

+

*'''Agree''' - I have been personally working on compiling all the information I can find on Dwarves in Tolkiens books, even if it conflicts with itself. Once it is compiled for my personal use I will copy it to this website. -- TolkienScholar91 11:08, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

It has been over a month (and there are "disagree" votes up there ^^) so I figured it's time for a new nomination; Númenor.

+

+

*'''Agree''' - I believe Númenor and its history to be some of the most interesting in all of the legendarium. For it is in this history that Gondor and Arnor (and many great things and people in Middle Earth) are rooted. --{{User:Breragor/sig}} 18:25, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

:::Wouldn't there be a banner on the page then? Look, it's about choosing Númenor as the article (i.e. whether you think it deserves such recognition) and NOT the article itself. This is a perfectly fine article, it's not a stub and not horribly written, so just take it easy, Mith. On this page you have disagreed with every article unless you wrote it! --{{unsigned|Breragor}}

+

+

*'''Disagree''' - Númenor is already featured on the [[Portal:Locations|Locations Portal]]. I think for the featured articles we display on the Main page we should look for our best articles, whatever the subject matter. When it comes to portals I think we can be more relaxed. --{{User:KingAragorn/sig}} 19:39, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

+

+

::::How do you even find the [[Portal:Locations|Locations Portal]]? {{unsigned|Breragor}}

+

+

:::::I made it. Also there's a link to it on the Main Page. All portals are currently under development. Please don't remove <nowiki>"{{unsigned|Breragor}}"</nowiki>, just sign your posts as you managed to do when you nominated Númenor yesterday. Thank you. --{{User:KingAragorn/sig}} 22:37, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

*# As the largest (by far) Tolkien wiki, I feel that each and ever article we have should be better than all our competitors. Our article is significantly lacking when compared to the [[wikipedia:J. R. R. Tolkien|current Wikipedia article]] (which has been featured);

+

*# No references at all: it contains an unused - and partly disordered - bibliography;

+

*# It's barely been improved over the last six years, which is why we have the article [[J.R.R. Tolkien/temp]] as a plan for future development.

+

:::Unfortunately, for all the above, I feel this article cannot become the featured article.--{{User:Mith/sig}} 11:14, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

+

+

*'''Disagree''' - This article is mostly good but it needs footnotes to round it off.--{{User:KingAragorn/sig}} 11:19, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

+

+

==[[Dwalin]]==

+

As Smaug has been featured for almost nine months now I think it is time to look for a new featured article. Personally I think [[Dwalin]] might be a good choice. It is well-writen, sourced, no maintaince templates and only one red link. Although Dwalin isn't as long as previous featured articles, it covers (almost) all information that can be found in the books. And, with [[The Hobbit (film series)|''The Hobbit'' (film series)]] coming this year people will search for more information about the Hobbit and characters/locations. Therefore it would be good if an article related to The Hobbit will appear on the main page. --[[User:Amroth|Amroth]] 19:57, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

::I don't like the main image.--{{User:KingAragorn/sig}} 15:20, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

+

+

:::I kind of agree, but we don't have many other images of him. The only other suitable image seems to be [[:File:New Line Cinema - Dwalin 2.png|this one]]. --[[User:Amroth|Amroth]] 19:55, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

+

+

==[[Radagast]]==

+

Radagast seems to me to be a good canditate for featured article -- I can't see any reason why not.--[[User:Morgan|Morgan]] 17:10, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

+

+

:+1! And [[Smaug]] has been featured for a very long time now.--{{User:KingAragorn/sig}} 17:17, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

After nomination, an article should receive five votes with with no objections within a month or so; each user being able to cast one vote. Each entry should begin with Agree, Disagree or Undecided and be signed by the user, and, if they choose, an explanation of their vote.

Agree. If I'm not mistaking, Gandalf has already been FA once. That doesn't mean it can't be again, but it's near the end of the queue. Oh, agree, btw. but the sourcing needs to be a bit better. -- Ederchil 08:01, 6 June 2008 (EDT)

Agree. This article is extensive, appears complete, well-referenced, and lavishly illustrated. It is a prime example of what an FA should be.--Theoden1 13:31, 7 June 2008 (EDT)

Gondor would be a good choice. It's extensive, covers many bases, and has the requisite references. It should be next in line to be voted on for FA status.--Theoden1 10:41, 28 July 2008 (EDT)

Undecided - although well-written, I think it needs to be better referenced as we should only show off the very best articles that TG has to offer. --Mith(Talk/Contribs/Edits) 14:19, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

I think they're not given enough credit nor enough recognition - they're the most overshadowed of the major races in Tolkien's legendarium.

Agree - I don't know if the banner at the top of the article matters, so if not it has my full support. Otherwise I vote for another Dwarves-related article. -- Breragor

Undecided - As an article it needs some work, as is clear with the {{sources}} template at the top. However I agree that as a race they are often overlooked. -- KingAragorn talk contribs edits email 03:32, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Disagree - A complete lack of sources, the structure is a bit haphazard and it contains a few too many redlinks and spelling errors for my liking. --Mith(Talk/Contribs/Edits) 12:08, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Agree - I have been personally working on compiling all the information I can find on Dwarves in Tolkiens books, even if it conflicts with itself. Once it is compiled for my personal use I will copy it to this website. -- TolkienScholar91 11:08, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

It has been over a month (and there are "disagree" votes up there ^^) so I figured it's time for a new nomination; Númenor.

Agree - I believe Númenor and its history to be some of the most interesting in all of the legendarium. For it is in this history that Gondor and Arnor (and many great things and people in Middle Earth) are rooted. --Breragor• (Talk • Contribs • Edits) 18:25, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Wouldn't there be a banner on the page then? Look, it's about choosing Númenor as the article (i.e. whether you think it deserves such recognition) and NOT the article itself. This is a perfectly fine article, it's not a stub and not horribly written, so just take it easy, Mith. On this page you have disagreed with every article unless you wrote it! --—Unsigned comment byBreragor (talk • contribs).

Disagree - Númenor is already featured on the Locations Portal. I think for the featured articles we display on the Main page we should look for our best articles, whatever the subject matter. When it comes to portals I think we can be more relaxed. -- KingAragorn talk contribs edits email 19:39, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

I made it. Also there's a link to it on the Main Page. All portals are currently under development. Please don't remove "{{unsigned|Breragor}}", just sign your posts as you managed to do when you nominated Númenor yesterday. Thank you. -- KingAragorn talk contribs edits email 22:37, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

As the largest (by far) Tolkien wiki, I feel that each and ever article we have should be better than all our competitors. Our article is significantly lacking when compared to the current Wikipedia article (which has been featured);

No references at all: it contains an unused - and partly disordered - bibliography;

It's barely been improved over the last six years, which is why we have the article J.R.R. Tolkien/temp as a plan for future development.

Unfortunately, for all the above, I feel this article cannot become the featured article.--Mith(Talk/Contribs/Edits) 11:14, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

As Smaug has been featured for almost nine months now I think it is time to look for a new featured article. Personally I think Dwalin might be a good choice. It is well-writen, sourced, no maintaince templates and only one red link. Although Dwalin isn't as long as previous featured articles, it covers (almost) all information that can be found in the books. And, with The Hobbit (film series) coming this year people will search for more information about the Hobbit and characters/locations. Therefore it would be good if an article related to The Hobbit will appear on the main page. --Amroth 19:57, 9 March 2012 (UTC)